“…they [Infowars] strive to make life both scarier and longer for everyone, a commendable goal.”

What a fantastic read.

I understand your frustration, and I think he is guilty of the things he is accused of also. I still think the justice department made the correct democratic decision of setting the precedent that the executive branch does not prosecute political figures when the electorate has a chance to make that decision.

I hate that the electorate decided that none of those offenses were damning enough to flush that turd, but that’s democracy. He won the popular vote and it’s up to those of us unhappy with the result to convince others that we need better leadership.

The justice dept went easy on Trump because it sets a very dangerous precedent for the current administration to use the power of the justice dept on political rivals. He was removed from office and his actions were investigated and displayed to the public. Under normal circumstances, those actions should make it so he cannot run again. The electorate are designed to be the check on political power, but it failed.

I fear elections no longer have that check. I do however believe the justice department made the right decision. I don’t think it should criminally prosecute political rivals, because then we end up with situations like Nivalny dieing in prison. The justice department played it’s role by exposing all of the criminal behavior, the electorate did not by allowing someone that dangerous back into power.

Okay, then what is the process for creating good policy?

Building a broad coalition without policy concessions was a waste of time? You’re going to have a tough time convincing me of that point.

Littlefinger embodied as a political party.

I mean, even with a union, if a company crumbles the laborers are out of a job.

Surprisingly less true!

It’s a monarchy… So yeah…

Cat probability: 98.3%

Is this the same Bob Ballard that found the Titanic and the Bismark?

I agree, we all have search engines and if someone doesn’t understand a word or phrase they can learn it on their own. Brilliant write up!

Well, not that shocked…

Was this the root cause??? Hahahaha

The interesting thing about the court is their power comes from our belief in their legitimacy. They don’t have any repercussions if the executive and legislature completely ignores their rulings.

It’s a double edged sword. If they allow this to happen, democracy crumbles under a new admin. If they do anything to deter authoritarians getting into power is technically anti-democratic too.

Either this admin undermines the belief in democracy by stopping an authoritarian administration to participate in elections or they allow the authoritarians to run and hope the electorate aren’t complete idiots (in a voting system rigged towards the authoritarians via the electoral college).

It is a politically savvy and ethically correct move. Really nice when those line up.

The argument I’m making is that we should not call them chemicals when they don’t have the capacity to make chemical reactions.

An analogy could be how we use the word weed. We call unwanted plants weeds. If there is mint growing in your yard and you don’t want it, it’s a weed. If you sell your house and the next owner likes it that mint is not a weed anymore. It’s still mint (element) but no longer a weed (chemical).

You make a good point. I should have said “things in the plasma state” should not be considered chemicals.

Hydrogen and Helium are elements, I guess it depends on what your definition of a chemical is.

The reason I’m saying plasma is not a chemical is because it is too energetic to make atom to atom bonds which I feel is the basis for chemistry. If something cannot interact chemically I feel we should not consider it a chemical.

Please note that I did not look up any formal definitions, just expressing my reasoning for my argument. (Aka I’m probably wrong).